President Donald Trump has dropped a bombshell, signaling his readiness to slap Russia with a fresh wave of sanctions after a brutal overnight assault on Ukraine that’s left the world reeling.
New York Post reported that just days ago, Russia unleashed its most devastating air strike on Ukraine since the conflict’s start, and Trump’s response on Sunday, September 7, 2025, from the White House lawn shows he’s not playing games anymore.
Before heading to the US Open in New York City, Trump told reporters he’s geared up for what he calls a “second stage” of sanctions against Moscow. “Yes,” he confirmed with characteristic brevity when pressed on the matter. While he didn’t spill the details, this move hints at a tougher stance than the progressive crowd might stomach, especially after their endless calls for diplomacy over action.
Russia’s latest barrage, happening overnight on the same Sunday, wasn’t just big—it was historic, with at least 810 drones and decoys raining down on Ukraine. The attack claimed at least four lives and injured 44, proving Moscow isn’t slowing down despite past talks of peace.
For the first time, a central government building in Kyiv took a direct hit, with damage reported to the roof and upper floors. Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko lamented, “For the first time, the government building was damaged by an enemy attack.” It’s a stark reminder that war doesn’t spare symbols of sovereignty, no matter how much the left pushes for de-escalation without teeth.
“We will restore the buildings, but lost lives cannot be returned,” Svyrydenko added in a somber statement. That’s the kind of raw truth the woke narrative often glosses over—war’s cost isn’t just brick and mortar.
Trump’s threat of new sanctions isn’t out of nowhere; last month, before a summit with Vladimir Putin in Alaska, he warned of targeting nations importing Russian oil. The goal? Cripple a key revenue stream—oil and gas—that keeps Russia’s war machine humming despite Western pressure.
While the “second stage” remains vague, it’s clear Trump aims to hit where it hurts, unlike the half-measures often floated by globalist elites. Svyrydenko praised the move, saying, “We appreciate President Trump’s prompt reaction and a strong signal of readiness.” Her hope for swift action is one conservatives can echo, tired as we are of endless delays in holding aggressors accountable.
“We hope this decision comes into effect soon,” she urged, a sentiment that cuts through the bureaucratic fog often clouding international responses. If Trump follows through, it could mark a refreshing return to prioritizing strength over appeasement.
Ukraine didn’t just sit idle during the attack; they intercepted over 745 drones and four missiles, a staggering defense against an assault that dwarfed Russia’s previous record of 728 drones in July. That’s grit, plain and simple, and it deserves respect over the usual hand-wringing about “both sides.”
Yet, despite Trump’s optimism for peace after his Alaska meeting with Putin, Russia’s aggression hasn’t let up. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky called the attack “ruthless,” a one-word gut punch that captures the stakes. His vow of an “appropriate response” suggests Kyiv isn’t banking solely on Western promises.
Zelensky’s refusal to meet Putin in Moscow, insisting instead that the Russian leader come to Kyiv, shows a spine of steel. “Putin doesn’t want to meet with me,” Zelensky told ABC News, hinting at Putin’s posturing for optics over substance. It’s a diplomatic chess move that exposes the hollowness of Kremlin overtures.
Svyrydenko didn’t mince words, calling Sunday’s strike a “barbaric attack” and urging the world to choke off Russia’s oil and gas profits. “The world must respond to this destruction not only with words, but with actions,” she insisted. That’s a call to arms for conservatives who’ve long argued sanctions must bite, not just bark.
Her plea for stronger measures aligns with Trump’s apparent direction, a rare moment where policy might outpace rhetoric. If the West listens, it could shift the war’s economic battlefield, proving that standing firm isn’t just moral—it’s practical. Let’s hope the usual suspects don’t water this down with their endless “dialogue” excuses.
